Thursday, July 27, 2017

Qualitative vs. Quantitative

It's not really "versus". It's a distinction between these two dimensions pertaining to data.

I was expecting to expatiate on this via a podcast, but I'm still weighing whether I want to pay money just to do podcasts. In the meantime, I'll compose an essay (this one) on this.

Nutshell punch line: The quantitative list of horrors perpetrated by Muslims is not merely a quantitative enumeration of incidents; it also has a qualitative dimension. We could have a dry list of "Islamic terror attacks" and if we only list
the sheer number of those killed, it would have less impact than if we
deepened our information with further details

What is that qualitative dimension?

Well, I'm glad you asked, Pepe.

First off, on the most basic level, the qualitative dimension is aroused by the sheer volume of the quantity. If our list of Muslim atrocities only had, say, 17 items for the past 100 years, it wouldn't pack much punch, comprende? Luckily (black humor here), we have thousands (for it is only reasonable to count also all the foiled attempts by Muslims to perpetrate terror). And not only do we have a shitload, but the quantity is increasing, perhaps exponentially (since these are not inanimate events of climate or geology, nor are they the kind of anthropological stats that over a long arc of time balance out to an overall steady state of stability, despite temporary spikes and dips; such as, for example, the incidence of bank robberies or carjackings).

For example, that in the attacks on Paris in 2015, the Muslim attackers not only wantonly slaughtered the men and women in the audience of the Bataclan theater, they also took time out to
torture them, including sexual mutilation. That's not just a mass
murder, it's a ghoulish mass murder.

One supposes torture ipso facto is ghoulish; but not necessarily. Some tortures are less ghoulish than others. For example, when the U.S. government waterboarded terrorists, that was less ghoulish than when Muslims in various Islamic countries drill into the prisoner's eardrum, or insert red-hot iron needles into eyeballs or up anuses; and so forth.

A third qualitative factor would be the ferocious fanaticism of Mohammedans. For example, just to pluck two examples from a fez of thousands one could cite in this regard, in the two terror attacks in Kenya in 2016, when not only did the Muslims go around shooting people dead and torturing them, they also put guns to their heads asking them Islamic questions (if they answered incorrectly, they would get a bullet in their head), In addition, the mass-murderers took prayer breaks to pray one of their five Islamic prayers in the middle of their terror attack, before resuming their torturing and killing.

I could cite hundreds of such examples from the Islamic jihad that has been steadily unfolding in the past 50 years (let alone just the past 15).

Another feature or facet of the qualitative is the systemic nature of the problem -- the mainstream Islamic motivation, the religious-cultural matrix that nourishes and guides it, the industrious global networking, and the grand goal, commanded by their God, of conquering the entire earth. This cluster of facets requires immersion in the data to appreciate (i.e., a long time of study), a capacity for dot-connection, and an open-minded freedom from PC MC.

Conclusion:

With all the qualitiative factors together -- the sheer volume of atrocities, the ghoulishness, the ferocious fanaticism, and the systemic nature binding and galvanizing the whole vortex -- amplifying our quantitative lists of Mohammedan atrocities, Islam becomes recognizable as a uniquely appalling and dangerous ideology, with no other religion or ideology even coming close in our time.

8 comments:

Egghead
said...

Note: I have omitted to listen to your podcasts. I like to read better.

Excellent essay - until your very last line which contains a great big whopper of a lie - which your own subconscious seems to recognize through your use of the word 'no' which the subconscious reportedly fails to recognize.

When you claim that 'no other religion or ideology is as appalling or dangerous as Islam,' you whitewash quite a few other past and present appalling and dangerous ideologies.

First, the 'noble savage' religions throughout the world have been quite appalling and dangerous with a gamut running from large scale human sacrifice to cannabalism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture

Second, more 'civilized' religions have employed and enjoyed accusations of witchcraft - used to torture and murder inconvenient people - mostly women.

Third, Islam has been stuck in its sad corridor of the world until Jewish people - as a committed group project - have inflicted Muslims on all of the halls of the white Christian West. How tragic that the self-proclaimed 'smartest' people in the world appear to enjoy the desire and reality to torture and mutilate and genocide non-Jews.

Fourth, Satanists are easily as appalling and dangerous as Islamists.

Fifth, Communists have been in a race with Islamists as to which group can torture and murder the most people - with Islamists having a head start, but Communists (under immense Jewish influence) having the 'brains' to murder the most people in the shortest amount of time.

Main point: Democide is a very real threat to all peoples in all times.

But, the NY Post said that the White House said that Mooch has NO role at this time in the Trump administration, so inquiring minds want to know what Mooch discovered, did, or threatened at the Export-Import Bank that got Mooch swiftly ejected from the bank (in a way that Trump used to his benefit to fire Priebus).

I wonder if anyone but me ever noticed that SBPDL keeps a kosher schedule. That, plus I commented once (here I think) about the oddity that no one on SBPDL ever mentioned Islam - and poof a rather tepid anti-Islam comment or two appeared along with a follow-on site minder comment informing everyone that they needn't worry their pretty little heads talking about Islam on SBPDL. Then, there were my few bland comments which were omitted to be published until it became too obvious that I was banned by someone on the backside - and poof one comment was published.